get_current_app

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description adds no behavioral details beyond what annotations already provide. Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description could have warned that the foregrounded app might change rapidly or that the package name might be null, but it does not.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, clear annotations, and an output schema), the description is mostly complete. However, it does not explain the return value, but the output schema handles that. The missing parameter description is a minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the description does not explain the 'device_id' parameter. With low coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not mention the parameter at all. The purpose is clear without parameter details, but the agent might need to know which device this refers to.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'package name of the currently foregrounded app', making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'list_apps' or 'wait_for_app' by specifying 'currently foregrounded'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as 'list_apps' or 'wait_for_app'. The context is clear but no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, so the usage is only implied.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.